# Dawkins makes another innocent mistake: The Gospels **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 21, 2009, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dawkins-makes-another-innocent-mistake-the-gospels/493877 "2009-04-21T19:03:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2009, 11:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dawkins-makes-another-innocent-mistake-the-gospels/493877/121 "2009-04-27T11:06:09Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > Hang on a mo, this one can’t possibly be taken literally - I mean, the original versions of the Bible weren’t written in English. The very quote itself is altered in both lettering and strokes by being in a different language. The same would appear to hold accurate for all of your quotes there. It is one thing to claim that the meaning holds the same throughout all versions of the Bible, but to claim that the exact wording holds true - even the exact strokes - and to do so in the non-original language is on the very face of it illogical. In the physical world it is illogical, but not in the spiritual, which is really where we live and where the Word really exists. Again I refer you to the 10 commandments, which there are 3 written versions in our physical world, each one is written differently physically (Ex 20 2-17, 34 11-27, Deut 5, 6-21). If this was just a book of man, and one that man was claiming it was of God these 3 should be the same, but they are different. I believe, actually I know the reason is that they are the exact same spiritually, but in our physical world there are different ways of expressing that spiritual truth. When we hear the 10 commandments, no matter what version, our spirit hears a single set of 10, no matter the text differences. This also goes for different translations, spiritually the text is the exact same, though there are different physical representations of it. As we read the King James version, or the NIV our spirit hears the Word in a way that is above language of man. God is much higher then us, His ways are higher then ours, but He wants us to learn His ways, as such He wants to reveal the truth to man, which requires challenging man’s preconceptions, giving man a book that seems so illogical and contradictory but at the same time is absolute truth. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2009, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dawkins-makes-another-innocent-mistake-the-gospels/493877/122 "2009-04-27T11:44:35Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > Proverbs 30:6 Since that’s the OT someone should have told the NT writers to cut it out. They added a bunch didn’t they? I will quote from John 1: > [@](#): > > 1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning. The Word was always there, it was revealed over time. Much like man’s study of science, before Einstein discovered E=mc^2 the physical reality previously existed. Man didn’t create a new law of physics, just discovered one that was there. The Word is eternal. The warning is not to add man’s word to God’s. We can see this is what happened to Eve here: God’s warning: (Gen 2:16b -17) “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.” Eve’s take on it(Gen 3 2b-3): > [@](#): > > "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, **and you must not touch it** , or you will die.’ " Bold mine, which is a addition to the Word of God. Why Eve added ‘and you must not touch it’ to the Word of God is not clear, we can assume that perhaps Eve added it for a extra level of protection, as we all sometimes do, for instance we know we should not shoot up heroine, if that was the rule by God, we might add we should not even touch it, though there is nothing wrong with touching the syringe. It seems to protect us. But it was that exact addition that allowed the serpent (who is Satan, as defined in Revelation), the foothold into Eve to get her to fall. The warning in the book of Revelation comes true: [QUOTE= Rev 22:18] I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. [/QUOTE] After that man has endured all the plagues in the book, or will in the case of future prophecy. So even though that verse was not revealed to Eve the law of God still existed, along with the effects, much like E=mc^2 existed before man discovered it. > [@](#): > > I’m not sure why this warning is necessary since you claim that it couldn’t happen. Let’s also mention that this verse concerns Revelation only, not the Bible as a whole. This is a false argument, the Word is not divisible as the Word is God. It unquestionably refers to the entire Bible, along with the defining of the serpent as Satan. It shows the return to God that we lost in Genesis. As man and God are separated in Genesis by sin, in Revelation we see man and God reunited. [QUOTE=Rev 22] 3No longer will there be any curse. The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city, and his servants will serve him. 4They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. 5There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign for ever and ever. [/QUOTE] > [@](#): > > Shame on you. Didn’t you just quote the verse that said don’t add to his words. Jesus is obviously speaking to Jews about the OT. He’s not referring to the NT because **none** of it was written yet. Again the Word is eternal, the revelation to man happens over time. Also since it is the NT that quotes Jesus’ acceptance of the OT, that part of the NT must be accepted as true if we are to take Jesus’ Word for it. > [@](#): > > This has zero to do with what we’re discussing. It’s an obvious fact that there are many interpretations of the Bible and various opinions about it’s authority. For me it’s a question of seeking and valuing the truth and trying to discern that from man’s traditions. God’s command is seek Him with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding. If you do those things He will bring you to His Word and prove it to you. On the way it may take you through the Koran, or atheism, or Buddhism, or numerous paths. He knows we are groping in the dark, He will see that and send us help. > [@](#): > > I’m thinking the Holy Spirit could use _anything_ to teach us and lead us toward the truth if that’s the sincere intent of our hearts. Written words, spoken words, pictures, nature, anything at all. That’s my point. Because the real teaching happens internally there is no need for any book , any written words to be given unwarranted and unintended authority. We don’t need to ignore or rationalize real evidence concerning biblical text to uphold a baseless tradition. God can use everything to teach us, but we need to understand His Spirit’s leading to understand them. The thing God is looking for is for us to seek Him and lean not on our own understanding. The Holy Spirit will lead you to His Word and teach you how to use it, which to me has been used to point out false teachings of man. When man states something that is untrue, the Holy Spirit will give me the scripture that counters it. > [@](#): > > I asked for something substantial in the way of a scriptural reference to show the Bible is an authoritative part of God’s plan as many Christian’s believe. You haven’t presented it. No one will because it doesn’t exist. Jesus’ use of it as the Word of God is pretty much a slam dunk IMHO, along with : [QUOTE=Deuteronomy 8:3] He humbled you, causing you to hunger and then feeding you with manna, which neither you nor your fathers had known, to teach you that man does not live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD. [/QUOTE] God makes it clear that every word from Him is very important, not to have any excluded. Part of the reason is so we can use it as a weapon against the enemy: [QUOTE=Eph 6:] 17Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Proverbs 30:5] "Every word of God is flawless; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him. [/QUOTE] > [@](#): > > That’s not to say people shouldn’t value the Bible or discount parts of it they find meaningful or uplifting. I just wish they’d be aware that it’s going on inside them and they don’t need to cling to traditional beliefs about the Bible that aren’t true. While they don’t need to cling to untrue beliefs about the Bible, our disagreement is what is untrue. You propose it’s a book, perhaps partly inspired by God perhaps not, but put together by man. I propose it is the unalterable Word of God who used man (sometimes with impure intentions) to distribute it to show His glory, and it is the Holy Spirit who is the only teacher of the Word, and that man must put aside all of man’s teachings to let God teach one from the beginning. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2009, 12:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dawkins-makes-another-innocent-mistake-the-gospels/493877/123 "2009-04-27T12:37:09Z")
**kanicbird** I refuse to continue this hijack. You will continue with the same tired old tortured logic you always do. Anyone can take verses out of context and insist they mean a certain thing to support their own personal beliefs. That is painfully evident in this last post of yours as you randomly picking verses about the word as if they refer to the Bible. There’s no indication they do. I don’t call that seeking the truth. I call that worshiping man’s tradition and twisting the passages to fit a preconceived doctrine. Good luck with that. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2009, 12:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dawkins-makes-another-innocent-mistake-the-gospels/493877/124 "2009-04-27T12:39:43Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > You need to distinguish between what is taught as Church doctrine and what is taught in Church seminaries and colleges. You want a mainstream seminary that backs up Dawkins? How about the Princeton Theological Seminary, home of the late Bruce Metzger, who was regarded as the foremost expert on Biblical manuscripts, and who was also an ordained presbyterian minister. > > [Secret Mark](http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/secretmark.html) Thank you for that link, **Diogenes** , I’d never read that epistle from Clement of Alexandria before. There are a couple of sentences in it which perfectly sum up why it’s practically impossible to engage Christians like **ITR champion** in real debate. Clement writes: > [@](#): > > For, even if they should say something true, one who loves the truth should not, even so, agree with them. For not all true things are the truth, nor should that truth which merely seems true according to human opinions be preferred to the true truth, that according to the faith. In other words it matters not that what you say is true, if it isn’t _truly_ true they’ll feel free to ignore it. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2009, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dawkins-makes-another-innocent-mistake-the-gospels/493877/125 "2009-04-27T13:49:29Z")
> [@kanicbird](#): > > In the physical world it is illogical, but not in the spiritual, which is really where we live and where the Word really exists. Again I refer you to the 10 commandments, which there are 3 written versions in our physical world, each one is written differently physically (Ex 20 2-17, 34 11-27, Deut 5, 6-21). If this was just a book of man, and one that man was claiming it was of God these 3 should be the same, but they are different. I believe, actually I know the reason is that they are the exact same spiritually, but in our physical world there are different ways of expressing that spiritual truth. When we hear the 10 commandments, no matter what version, our spirit hears a single set of 10, no matter the text differences. No, I don’t think this is fair to interpret from the text. If it merely mentioned “messages” or “the word”, as indeed it does sometimes, then i’d say you could interpret the Bible as you have there. But it specifically points out letters and even strokes cannot be changed. It makes no sense to refer to the spiritual message of the Bible in those terms; it seems to me a very clear sign that hear the actual physical prescence of the book is being talked about. > [@](#): > > This also goes for different translations, spiritually the text is the exact same, though there are different physical representations of it. As we read the King James version, or the NIV our spirit hears the Word in a way that is above language of man. That’s illogical. For one thing, my interpretation is different from yours, which can mean one of two things; either you are incorrect on this point, or you are correct but the human spirit is such that it is not always capable of fully understanding the spiritual Word, in which case your interpretation is as suspect as mine. > [@](#): > > God is much higher then us, His ways are higher then ours, but He wants us to learn His ways, as such He wants to reveal the truth to man, which requires challenging man’s preconceptions, giving man a book that seems so illogical and contradictory but at the same time is absolute truth. The Bible seems illogical and contradictory? That’s a new one on me. 😉 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dawkins-makes-another-innocent-mistake-the-gospels/493877.md?page=6)